MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315701961 · doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12667

Phylogenetic ecology and the greening of cities

2016· article· en· W2315701961 on OpenAlexafffund
J. Scott MacIvor, Marc W. Cadotte, Stuart W. Livingstone, Jeremy Lundholm, Simone‐Louise E. Yasui

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Ecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science
KeywordsGreen infrastructureEcologyHabitatPhylogenetic diversityEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementEcosystem servicesWork (physics)Diversity (politics)Phylogenetic treeFunctional ecologyGeographyBiologyEnvironmental planningSociologyEngineeringEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Ecologists are increasingly involved in city‐making, especially in the development of green infrastructure and other designed plant communities. Plant communities that are more phylogenetically related are more similar in functional traits and adaptations to their environment than distant relatives. Knowledge of how evolutionary relationships among plant species influence ecosystem functions could be applied to green infrastructure to improve benefits such as urban cooling, habitat creation and stormwater management. The intended outcomes of manipulations of phylogenetic diversity ( PD ) may vary depending on project goals, particularly when considering the trade‐offs between multiple ecosystem functions. For instance, constraining PD could improve survival and performance in stressful environments or short growing seasons. Increasing PD could improve habitat diversity, aesthetics and other direct human benefits. Synthesis and applications . Given the potential benefits of considering phylogenetic relationships of plant communities in green infrastructure, we recommend that ecologists work with landscape architects and other design professionals to test how ecophylogenetics – the application of phylogenies in ecology – might aid in achieving desired outcomes for green infrastructure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied EcologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207